|
Jackson case judge rules in favor of DA
Indictment stands as raids called legal
By DAWN HOBBS
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER
Tom Sneddon
|
 |
|
In two major decisions bolstering the prosecution, a judge ruled Thursday that the criminal case against Michael Jackson will proceed and that raids of Neverland Valley Ranch and a private investigator's office were legal.
The rulings came in response to defense motions to throw out the indictment against the entertainer and to bar evidence seized in the raids from being presented at trial. Mr. Jackson faces charges of child molestation and conspiracy.
Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville's decisions, announced in a Santa Maria courtroom during a pretrial hearing, are the most significant rulings in the case thus far and a rejection of the defense team's allegations that the prosecution and law enforcement officers acted illegally.
The defense indicated in an earlier hearing that if the judge ruled against them, they planned to challenge his decisions with the Court of Appeal.
Judge Melville ruled that only 16 of more than 150 items seized from the Neverland raid will be barred from trial. The items include notes, photographs and at least one video and one audiotape, most of which the prosecution had already agreed would not be allowed as evidence.
He rejected defense arguments that evidence seized from a private investigator's office was inadmissable. Mr. Jackson's lawyers had argued that because the investigator worked for Mr. Jackson's attorney at the time, the evidence was taken in violation of attorney-client privilege. Among the items seized at the Beverly Hills office were video and audiotapes and computer hard drives.
However, the judge expressed concern about some of the issues the defense raised and characterized as "regrettable" the tone Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon used when questioning two witnesses -- identified by the News-Press as the accuser's father and Russell Halperin, his divorce lawyer -- during the grand jury proceedings. But the judge indicated that Mr. Sneddon's actions did not justify setting aside the indictment.
"There is nothing about the exchanges, unpleasant as they may be, which would appear likely to intimidate the grand jury members themselves or deflect them from a consideration of the large volume of other evidence presented," Judge Melville stated in his 12-page ruling upholding the indictment.
Mr. Jackson pleaded not guilty in April to all the charges on the 10-count indictment. The case is scheduled to go to trial Jan. 31. A gag order in the case prevented attorneys on either side from commenting on Thursday's rulings.
The other issues addressed in the half-day hearing paled in comparison to the rulings, which came moments before court adjourned. The judge ordered the prosecution to turn over information about informants and other material generated during the investigation to the defense. Arguments on defense motions to remove Mr. Sneddon from the case and to lower Mr. Jackson's bail were postponed until the next hearing, scheduled for Nov. 4 and 5.
Although the judge ruled against them, defense attorneys have made some gains. Through public hearings on the motions, the defense team -- led by Thomas Mesereau -- was able to put Mr. Sneddon and the prosecution's key witnesses on the stand. They locked prosecution witnesses into their testimony, laying the groundwork to challenge their stories at trial. In the process, defense lawyers presented their client's side of the story to the public and potential jurors through the intense media coverage.
Defense lawyers asserted that Mr. Sneddon abused his power during the grand jury proceedings by threatening witnesses. They also contended that grand jurors were not properly instructed on the law of conspiracy and that no evidence presented linked Mr. Jackson to the alleged conspiracy. For these reasons, the defense said, the indictment should be thrown out.
In his ruling, Judge Melville stated: "It is important to note that there is no significant (defense) attack made upon the indictment, except with respect to the crime of conspiracy."
The allegations of lewd acts with a child and of administering alcohol to commit the molestation were not challenged by the defense, he said.
Judge Melville's ruling describes the prosecution's allegations of conspiracy, adding new detail to what has been reported in a case shrouded in such secrecy that the full indictment has never been released. His ruling offers the following account of the prosecution's accusations:
"The theory of the prosecution seems to be that in the wake of a television documentary in which Mr. Jackson seeks to explain and justify having unrelated children sleep in his bedroom, he and his advisors determined to prepare a rebuttal video in which it was made clear that no appropriate conduct had occurred."
They wanted the young cancer patient -- who appeared with him in the British documentary --to appear in the rebuttal, the judge continued. Mr. Jackson called the boy and his family and invited them to attend a press conference in Miami, telling them travel arrangements had already been worked out, the summary said.
"The family arrived in accordance with the plan. No press conference occurred. Mr. Jackson personally explained to the mother that her children were in danger and that to deal with the threats she should cooperate with the filmmakers, who later requested she sign the documents authorizing suit against the (British)."
The family was then flown to Neverland where the boys were invited to sleep in Jackson's bedroom, prosecutors allege.
"The family's movements were arguably constrained," the judge's summary says. "They were not permitted to see the original documentary when it aired and they understood their phone calls were monitored. The rebuttal video was filmed in West Hills, and passports and visas were obtained for travel to Brazil."
The judge continued: "The family's apartment was vacated and their belongings put in storage. The family left Neverland, but were encouraged to return. When the mother left again, her children stayed behind. "It is reported that a written directive that one of the children should not leave Neverland Ranch was distributed to security personnel."
The judge also pointed out: "None of this testimony suffices
to establish conclusively at his stage that crimes actually occurred
or that a conspiracy actually existed or that Mr. Jackson had any
direct involvement or did anything wrong. Innocent explanations
are entirely possible, and controverting evidence may exist. Those
issues remain to be resolved at trial.
|
